Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The contemporary translation economy of our globalizing digital world is deeply intertwined with information and communication technologies and the Internet, with the once separate sphere of machine translation lately converging more tangibly and impactfully with translation and interpreting practices as we have traditionally understood them. The decisions on what to translate, and by whom, why, where, and when, have always been conditioned by ideology, politics, economies, and the diverse power structures and dynamics at play in society. The Internet has brought with it the growth of a “parallel” world of human social and cultural practices in digital form, one where the display and dissemination of knowledge are intimately linked to the presence, visibility, and representation on the Web of one’s language and culture, both through native language use in communication and through practices of translation and localization. Analogous to material and physical territorial geographic spaces, virtual spaces reflect tensions and asymmetries of power. In this chapter we discuss these linguistic and translational relationships of asymmetry through the prism of digital world technologies and economies, and their implications for lesser-used and low- or no-resourced language groups. This discussion is followed by examples from two contexts: firstly, the broader Indigenous territorial context of First Nations peoples in Canada; and secondly, the Arctic Indigenous cross-territorial circumpolar groups of Inuit peoples in Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".